BOINNNNNNNG!!!! (!!!)

AMONG LIKELY VOTERS, 52% WOULD VOTE FOR PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH, 41% WOULD VOTE FOR JOHN KERRY, AND 3% WOULD VOTE FOR NADER

That’s just one poll, but if the rest track with it, we now know why Kerry melted down on the air last night.

This election is looking more and more like 1988 every day, especially given Dukakis campaign manager Susan Estrich’s wig-out today, promising a boatload of “independent” Dem dirty tricks.

UPDATE: A couple of readers note that Estrich’s rant appears to be out of character for her, and I tend to agree… except that this is what Estrich was like during the ’88 campaign. I thought she’d gotten over it, but the dynamics of this race are so similar to Bush-Dukakis, I’m not surprised she’s reverting.

Think about it: the Dems convince themselves that they’re running against a weak, dumb opponent, and they’re going to get their own back after a long time in the wilderness. They lead in the polls after their convention, and the sureness that they have this one in the bag grows.

Then the Republican candidate blows right past them in his own convention, and they’re shattered. Not just because they’re trailing when they thought they were going to win, but because their ideas and policies have been so effectively exposed and apparently rejected in favor of their opponents’.

Of course, they can’t have been wrong all along–this must be due to Republican dirty tricks! Not fair! Not fair!

We’ll be hearing a lot of that, for a long time I think.

Advertisements

Like this:

LikeLoading...

Related

This entry was posted on September 3, 2004 at 2:06 pm and is filed under Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
Both comments and pings are currently closed.

No, I don’t think so. I’m surmising that Kerry panicked based on his own private polling (and also that a lot of people had gone to bed and/or turned off the TV by the time he made that “petty” speech).

Is the Toricelli switchero still an option? Just curious, I think voters would really see the Dems as ridulous if they tried it. Who could they use? Edwards? Hillary? Dean (he he)? Discuss amongst youselves as they say.

There’s almost no point repeating Instapundit coverage, but look at this: For the first time since the Presidential race became a two person contest last spring, there is a clear leader, the latest TIME poll shows. If the 2004 election

I think Susan and her hooligan friends are going to drive their party into an early grave.

Witness the vast difference between the way the two parties dealt with dissent? Boston put them in a ‘Free Speech Zone’, if they wanted to be near the DNC party meeting.

New York let them go where they would, in the public venue.

Then look at the difference in the way the dissenters behaved. In Boston pro-DNC demonstrators attacked pro-life demonstrators. In New York, pro-DNC demonstrators obstructed traffic, abused and harrassed RNC delegates on the street, disrupted speakers at the RNC meetings, etc., etc.

Heck, someone took a shot at the GOP headquarter in West Virginia last night while a bunch of their volunteers were in the building watching Bush’s speech.

Now Susan threatens to do more?

What? They’ll use a banned assault weapon in their next drive-by shooting?

Dean would have really electrified the Dem base. He would have gone down in flames but would have had a wild convention that might have set the cornerstone for a future populist movement, a la the GOP convention in 1964. Instead, they chose Kerry, on the basis of his dullness, his four months of Viet Nam service, and his “electability”.

Also, if all of her seemingly baseless accusations are true, why not just produce them, instead of threatening to produce them? There’s a big difference. It’s like the difference between the guy who threatens to whip your ass and the guy who just walks over and whips your ass. If you’ve got the goods, produce the goods. Otherwise, shut the hell up.

The lastest Time poll shows a Bush bounce — a double-digit lead for the first time over John Kerry: 52 percent Bush, 41 percent John Kerry and 3 percent Ralph Nader — which means Nader wouldn’t be the factor this

That was wicked hilarious reading, the spectacle of Susan Estrich trash-talking and promising to bring doom on the Bush-Cheney campaign. Almost as intimidating as Dukakis in a tank!

Anyway, all those little “scandals” just brought up as a taste of what’s to come – the bloody Dems already raised these in 2000. And Kerry was yammering on about the President’s Vietnam service back in February, if not earlier. I’m afraid they’ll have to try a lot harder than that. What a pathetic bunch of losers.

WTF is Estrich smoking, and what rock has she been under? F9/11, and the MoveOn BushHitler crap, and the R’s are the ones who are throwing dirt? What little respect I had for her just vanished. The self-rightousness she shoveled in that bit is beyond reason. I don’t recall any R’s making the Kerry=PolPot that would seem natural, since he admitted to commiting war crimes.
Un-frickin-believe-able….

The Democrats seem to have this air of entitlement. They feel that all the elections are theirs by right, and if it doesn’t actually happen, it must have been dirty tricks or it was stolen. Kerry has this same sense of entitlement. “How dare they question my service or my statements and actions after the war or my 20 years of the Senate or my ever-revolving positions on the war. Don’t you know who I am? I served in Vietnam and I’m supposed to be President.” In their minds, it’s supposed to be a coronation rather than an election.

Estrich was this shrill during the Clinton impeachment but as from ’00 till recently she’s been a rare voice of reason among Democrats, but she’s been reverting to impeachment form, and not just last night, her comments on Rudy and Zell after their respective speeches had enough venom to kill Rasputin. If she’s going over the edge, you know that less sane people like Carville, Begala, McCauliffe and the rest of the Dems must be badly in need of whatever medication nurse Ratchet was doling out.

Some offended observers saw Christian crosses in the wood panels of lecterns at the Republican National Convention, but others say these critics are cross-eyed. The debate intensified Thursday when The New York Times ran a front-page photo of Vice President Dick Cheney standing behind a lectern that had multicolored panels forming an image that some are convinced is a Christian cross. To Cheney’s right is a smaller lectern, in which contrasting colored patterns more clearly intersect in a cross-like pattern.

Estrich has become completely unhinged. Perhaps after this she’ll finally go away for good. Her voice on TV is like nails on a chalkboard.

This just shows why Republicans are better at business. George Soros spends $10 million for an unprecedent torrent of venom but the guy backing the Swifties has only a few hundred thousand out of his pocket. I’ve come to the conclusion that Soros has a dual personality disorder. The sensible personality makes all the money and the LLL personality flushes it down the MoveOn.org toilet.

Estrich has become completely unhinged. Perhaps after this she’ll finally go away for good. Her voice on TV is like nails on a chalkboard.

This just shows why Republicans are better at business. George Soros spends $10 million for an unprecedent torrent of venom but the guy backing the Swifties has only a few hundred thousand out of his pocket. I’ve come to the conclusion that Soros has a dual personality disorder. The sensible personality makes all the money and the LLL personality flushes it down the MoveOn.org toilet.

Former Dukakis campaign manager explores new depths on the concept of hypocricy, by proclaiming that her side has been absolutely blameless (unlike those evil Republicans) in fueling untruths and smears in the Presidential campaign.

Susan Estrich is quite sad. The problem with her ‘theory’ is – they are going to mount personal attacks and still ignore Christmas in Cambodia, the “V” for valor and the 1994 Kerry Amendment advocating $6B cuts in defense. The people are not liking all the negativity anyway – we’ve sat through 18 months of Howard Dean, Al Gore, Hillary Clinton, Terry McAuliffe, etc. screaming and smearing Bush. I think most people think what’s happening to Kerry is Bush finally fighting back. If they, the Kerry wizards, sink even lower than before – not only will he lose – but politics and the precedent set for future campaigns will guarantee that most americans will lose all faith in our political process. In this day and age – you’re not going to find someone who didn’t smoke pot, drink or have an affair at the very least. People who live in glass swift boats, shouldn’t throw stones.

Anyone out there wondering when Kerry is going to show up for a speech in sweat pants with a fifth of Jack? (maybe the only thing worse than his midnight meltdown yesterday)

Anyone wondering what the hell Estrich was thinking when she wrote her column?? Asking “what if Bush fell off the wagon?”, then suggesting that he might get wasted and start launching nuclear missiles? How insane, sad, and insulting is that?

The left is really and truly cracking up. It would be funny if we didn’t have to suffer through watching these miserable people consume themselves with denial and hate.

I have to marvel at Bush’s (and others’) restraint. Can you picture being in his shoes, having to sit and listen to people calling you Hitler for three years, calling you an idiot, saying you were AWOL, claiming you were part of a grand conspiracy to steal oil, accusing you of all but masterminding 9/11 itself– and NOT lashing out with a torrent of rage and righteous retaliation on national TV, especially when given the perfect opportunity over and over again?

When he said last night that “One thing I have learned about the presidency is that whatever shortcomings you have, people are going to notice them; and whatever strengths you have, you’re going to need them,” he wasn’t frickin’ kidding.

I am wondering if Ms. Estrich’s invocation to chaos has not already started. AP spread a malicious fabrication that Republicans BOOED when Bush told them about Clinton’s heart surgery. People who were there protested. Drudge has the audio which is stunning: NO BOOES.

Unfortunately, the LIE is all over the globe, being repeated everywhere.

This is a real scandal. Whoever wrote this needs to be fired and the AP needs to send out a global correction for prominent use.

Think about it: the Dems convince themselves that they’re running against a weak, dumb opponent, and they’re going to get their own back after a long time in the wilderness.

I know the Democrats consider elections to be war. Too bad they’re not fans of Sun Tzu:

Hence the saying: If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat.

Disagree completely about Ms. Estrich. Everytime I have seen her paired off against someone with points she can’t win against, She starts talking over the opposition and or launching unsupported attacks. This seems to be more of the same.

Bush is an actual human being. Kerry, based on his performance last night, looks neither human or alive. I know looks don’t matter, BUT, humanness does. He might come across better in person – but Bush comes across better on TV and in person. People want to like you…bottom line.

I feel that George W has done a good job as president for the last four years.

I have hated John Kerry since I left the Armed Forces in 1970 feeling that I had to hide my past and feeling that my country hated me because I allowed myself to be drafted.

The whining Democrats have refused to concede defeat in the 2000 election. I won’t try to argue that George won, but I can say beyond any argument that Gore lost.

Bill Clinton stated early in the democratic jockeying for nominations that he had advised all of the candidates….. Hmmmm. Did he advise Howard Dean to go to Plains GA to go to Church with Jimmy Carter on the Sunday before the Tuesday primary? I was amazed at the time. Iowa lost more farms to foreclosure than anywhere else in the nation.. Can anyone remember “Farm Aid Concerts”. \

I think that Bill felt he had to run an unelectable man against a weak incumbent, or Hilary would not stand a chance in 2008.

Now the polls have been running pretty close over the last month. Suddenly Bill’s campaign managers show up on Kerry’s doorstep. then we have a Kerry meltdown… What is going on.

Now as I see it, if Kerry wins, Hillary is stopped in her tracks and possibly we have the added benefit of the demise of the democratic party and the Dems will finally shut up about 2000. And George has made our country strong enough to withstand four years of indecision.

If George wins, the democrats will continue screaming and obstructing for at least four years. Possibly we will have another attempt by the Communist Propaganda Machine…(oops meant mainstream press) to overthrow the will of the American Voter ala Richard Nixon. Can the bloggers stop it?

So you see my dilemma. Do I go along with Bill and Hillary and Vote for George? Or do I cast my ballot for the future of America and expose the Communist underbelly of the Democrats?

Daschle has been an irritation to me since spring of 2001. he is the main reason I won’t go with my brother on his tours to Deadwood to gamble. Hope you are right but the last polls I saw had him a few points ahead of Thune.

Don’t be a fool. Whoever wins this election is going to name perhaps as many as 4 Supreme Court justices. To suggest that we can withstand 4 years of Kerry and his court is absolute nonsense. Put a democrat in the WH right now and you can kiss the constitution goodbye.

E.Nough asked
“Are you sure you don’t have your cause and effect reversed?”

He melted down after the Republican convention had everyone chatting up its powerful impact. He knew that his numbers were slipping, invoked largely by media obsession with the Republican ‘show’. Even the liberals were bemoaning the Republican ability to ‘put on a good face’.

They were talking about how the Republicans were parading the moderates Giuliani, McCain and Schwarzenegger, to make Americans think these rational, well-spoken moderates were actually a reflection of this hateful right-wing ticket.

This accusation is comical when you think of how passionately the libs hated Schwarzenegger just a few months ago – but his speech was stellar and very old school conservative. He even reused that ‘girly man’ comment that got him in such hot water in California. He invoked Communist Russia as his childhood analogy to Democrats (soft?) and said Richard Nixon made him want to be a Republican!

And, it sounded great! Kerry’s camp knew that. The Republican speakers successfully portrayed Kerry as ‘out of touch’ and too liberal. Apparently Kerry forgot the first rule of a real liberal winning a national election. Pretend you’re a moderate Democrat. (Clinton 92′, Leiberman 00′) The convention successfully highlighted the Kerry plan to ‘fix’ America through a tax and spend philosophy and how the Republicans are the patriots that want to preserve this great land for future generations. Breast beating? Yeah, but people eat that stuff up. It worked and everyone knew it.

All this ‘mean spirited’ crap is post-Miller spin, in an attempt to paint the entire convention with a hateful brush for those who didn’t bother actually watching the convention. It’s revisionist politics. They were all working on different talking points Tuesday night.

But, perhaps you were talking about his meltdown last week where the rumors came out about him getting angry at his team for not beating up on Bush more, or retorting the SwiftVets more hatefully.

I think that the likelihood is good that he did start melting down after he realized the SwiftVets had shaved a serious number off vet votes. So, that’s definitely the point of heatup for Kerry. But, his meltdown was still poll driven. He ran around trying to figure out what was going wrong. And since he seldom takes responsibility for anything, to blame the polls on his droll demeanor or nutty Senate record couldn’t make sense. It must be the consultants!

Kerry started the Vietnam comparison back in April, claiming that there was some incriminating information available about George W. Bush’s ‘AWOL’ status. But, we already got that. We all knew that the salute and the ‘reporting for duty’ thing was to contrast Bush’s lack of service with Kerry’s Vietnam service. Kerry’s thinking that the electorate were just too stupid to understand the nuance of this entire campaign. Was it possible that message was understood and it was a weak platform for a campaign? No, not in Kerry’s mind. That’s not possible. If he’d just speak more plainly the proletariat would understand. So, he went on the attack.

“Dean would have really electrified the Dem base. He would have gone down in flames but would have had a wild convention that might have set the cornerstone for a future populist movement, a la the GOP convention in 1964.”

Only if we allow that “setting the cornerstone for a future populist movement” includes getting the remaining Jacksonians among the Democrats so disgusted with the Petulant Left that they walk out (probably behind Miller) and start their own party.

I don’t think that the “Torricelli option” is realistic. I think that each state makes its own decision as to who is on the ballot. I can’t imagine that the Democrats could convince the courts in all the states in which they have a chance of winning (it doesn’t makes a difference who they run in Texas, but it does in Pennsylvania).